CAlories on Atkins??

[amazon1]

Are you supposed to have about 1500 calories as a guide when your on Atkin's? I could do weight watchers and eat 1500 calories. I'm really hungry at 1500 calories a day no matter what I eat.

[atkinsgal08]

Re: Carbs, calories and stalls. . . .

>>Are you supposed to have about 1500 calories as a guide when your on Atkin's?>>

You took what I told you in another topic out of context!

I said that no one doing Atkins should do less than 1500 calories ... it's not a maximum amount.

What exactly are you eating ... in your other topic you stated your carbs and calories were "low" ... what's "low" exactly?

[Aways2Go]

Re: Carbs, calories and stalls. . . .

if you consume fewer calories than your body requires at rest then you'e just buying into the low-cal phenomenon, which sends your body into starvation mode, storing all available energy, regardless if you're eating the perfect atkins food. you HAVE to consume more than your minimal energy requirement to lose weight (roughly, your weight x 10 = min cal requirement).

Not to be argumentative, but I don't think I buy into anything and I eat less than my alleged daily calorie requirement every single day as calculated on the "sedentary" level (the lowest activity level option usually given)... I eat until I'm full, all day, every day, and that generally works out to somewhere in the vicinity of 1800 calories a day, give or take a few hundred. If I went by the 10x rule, I would have to eat 2800 calories a day every day right now. I don't want that much food, and have no intention of forcing myself to eat that many extra calories beyond what it takes to make me full every day. That seems like bad training to me, reinforcing bad eating behaviors by making myself eat more than is necessary to be satisfied when I have already eaten a reasonable amount for the day and am not hungry. I consider reasonable (for me) anything in the mid/upper teens to low 2000 range.

Also I have not found that I HAD to consume more than my minimum daily calorie requirement (calculated at the "sedentary" level) to lose weight, as evidenced by the fact that I have been eating this way for 4 months and have lost 40 pounds and think I may have gone over 2800 calories (10x my current weight) MAYBE 4 or 5 times during this whole time. The first month I did eat a little over 2k fairly regularly, but by the second month it settled around 1800 and has stayed there with little to no effort on my part. Not to mention the fact that when I first started, if I went by "10 times my body weight in calories" it would have been over 3000 cals a day at that point.

Like I said, I'm not trying to be argumentative, just pointing out my own experience. As long as I eat somewhere between 1500 and 2000 calories a day, I don't really give my calorie consumption a second thought. If I eat several hundred over that amount on occasion, I don't really pay much attention to that either. But I do make effort some days if necessary to not go UNDER 1500 or so, as I certainly don't need any kind of slowdown in my metabolism and don't want to risk that if I can cure it instantly with a spoon of butter on something or mayo on a piece of meat. I DO think that consistently eating really low calorie might slow down one's weight loss.

As long as I continue to lose 8 to 12 pounds a month, as I have thus far, I will continue with my 1800ish calories a day and honestly not worry about them a whole lot. At my current weight, this is 6.5 times my weight in calories. As I have mentioned elsewhere, maybe the 10x rule is more appropriate for those who are not 75 pounds or more away from their goal as I am.

I also note that in DANDR, Dr. Atkins gives some examples of his patients who weigh well more than 10x the calories they are taking in daily per some sample menus listed, and he makes no comment about them needing to up their calories in order to lose weight. Page 35 is one such example, where a patient weighing 280 lbs is noted as taking in about 2100 cals a day (7.5 x his stated weight) and losing 50 pounds over the next 3 months. Obviously he did not need 10x his weight in calories daily to lose, nor does Dr. Atkins mention anything to that effect.

No, I don't think Atkins should be "low calorie" nor does it seem Dr. Atkins meant for it to be. But I think the "10x" rough guideline is exactly that - a very rough guideline - and I have not found it to be necessary in my own case whatsoever, at least thus far. If my weight loss slows dramatically as I get nearer to my goal, I would give it further consideration.

Just my two cents.

[atkinsgal08]

Re: Carbs, calories and stalls. . . .

>>I think the "10x" rough guideline is exactly that - a very rough guideline>>

Yes ... that's why I say it's a "rule of thumb".

Many people undereat ... thinking less is better, which isn't true with Atkins!

Looking at and "counting" calories is a tool for someone who is having difficulty. When I stopped losing, I discovered it was because I wasn't eating enough ... and I used both my BMR and the "rule of thumb" to figure out how much I should be eating (they were actually quite close) ... so I know from experience that paying attention to caloric levels can be useful.

If what you're doing, Always2Go is working, then fine!

[Georgiana]

Re: Carbs, calories and stalls. . . .

When I stopped losing, I discovered it was because I wasn't eating enough ... and I used both my BMR and the "rule of thumb" to figure out how much I should be eating (they were actually quite close) ... so I know from experience that paying attention to caloric levels can be useful.

Been there! At one point, I used to eat something like 1100-1200 calories on average... and I ended up stalling (duh!). Increasing my calories did the trick. 10x(weight) was/is pretty close to my BMR as well.

I recently read a paper on low-carbohydrate diets where the authors used 10x(weight) for the caloric intakes of the subjects. Unfortunately, I don't remember the authors or the title... Of course there was nothing "scientific" in choosing 10x(weight) though.

[liv]

Re: Carbs, calories and stalls. . . .

That would be eating pretty low calories for someone like me. But maybe that is what I have to do I could be in denial.

[atkinsgal08]

Re: Carbs, calories and stalls. . . .

>>At one point, I used to eat something like 1100-1200 calories on average.>>

I was eating 900! No wonder I wasn't losing!!!

>>Of course there was nothing "scientific" in choosing 10x(weight) though.>>

It's one of those "rules of thumb" that turn out to work for many people!

[Aways2Go]

Re: CAlories on Atkins??

I think I just feel compelled to comment on my own experience because I see that rule of thumb mentioned frequently on these boards, and it occurred to me that if I hadn't already started Atkins at that point when I first saw it mentioned, and I read that I was going to HAVE TO EAT about 3200 calories a day (I started at 318 lbs) in order to lose any weight at all that I might have just said forget it, there is no way I'm eating that many calories - and it would have pushed me back to wondering what diet would EVER work for me.

I would just hate to think that someone who weighs say, 400 pounds, and desperately needs to get to 200 would be discouraged by thinking they absolutely wouldn't lose if they didn't take in about 4k calories a day.

[msanjelpie]

Re: CAlories on Atkins??

When I was on a low calorie diet, 1500 calories a day left me hungry... On Atkins, 1500 calories leaves me content. Because ketosis is a natural appetite suppressant eating the same amount of calories as on a low calorie diet makes it more enjoyable for me. I found that in order to lose on Atkins I have to be around 1500 calories a day. To lose on a low calorie diet, I had to be around 1200 calories a day.

[mizski]

Re: CAlories on Atkins??

When I was on a low calorie diet, 1500 calories a day left me hungry... On Atkins, 1500 calories leaves me content. Because ketosis is a natural appetite suppressant eating the same amount of calories as on a low calorie diet makes it more enjoyable for me. I found that in order to lose on Atkins I have to be around 1500 calories a day. To lose on a low calorie diet, I had to be around 1200 calories a day.

Those are my calorie numbers too! I actually was eating about 1200ish/day when I began Induction and was closer to 1500 the second week. Now my calories range between 1300 - 1700 (sometimes lower or higher depending on what I eat).

My cals are lower when I have a lot of fish and higher when I have red meats.

[Elizellen]

Re: CAlories on Atkins??

Good point aways2go
Maybe if people want to 'count calories' they should be thinking of 10-12 times their goal weight instead??

[atkinsgal08]

Re: CAlories on Atkins??

>> Maybe if people want to 'count calories' they should be thinking of 10-12 times their goal weight instead??>>

That can work for some ... for some it might mean they're still undereating.

The "rule of thumb" I know of is for current weight.

Of course, there can always be another "rule of thumb".

[atkinsgal08]

Re: CAlories on Atkins??

>>I would just hate to think that someone who weighs say, 400 pounds, and desperately needs to get to 200 would be discouraged by thinking they absolutely wouldn't lose if they didn't take in about 4k calories a day.>>

Here's my experience in advising people over 300 pounds ... when they report they're not losing, and one looks at their menu (and finds enough carbs) ... then one looks at the water ... and then the calories.

Very often someone who is at a high weight is coming at Atkins with the calorie in/calorie out thinking ... or thinking that less is better.

And they very often are eating around 1500 calories or less ...

So ... encouraging them to eat more (and some people work better with a quantitative number, thus 10-12 times your current body weight) is what I've done. I generally ask them to try eating more ... even 2000 or 2500 calories ... for two weeks and see how it works. Invariably, they start losing.

I agree ... that a 400 pound person might not need 4,000 calories ... they are, however, going to need more that 1500-1800!

Looking at calories is a trouble-shooting tool for me when I'm helping someone ... as I've said before, it's not a formula ... and some people will be able to eat more/less and loose.

[Georgiana]

Re: CAlories on Atkins??

Maybe if people want to 'count calories' they should be thinking of 10-12 times their goal weight instead??

I'm not sure how this would make sense. It implies that one should consume the same amount of calories regardless of one's weight. A 300+ lbs person certainly has different nutritional requirements than someone who is 130 lbs.

[Eama]

Re: CAlories on Atkins??

that a 400 pound person might not need 4,000 calories ... they are, however, going to need more that 1500-1800!

I'm pretty close to that, and actually find it hard now to get in 2500 calories. Before Atkins or dieting, I'm sure I was eating 4000 calories. Heck, I'd consume more than 1000 calories per day just with juices and soda.

Now I get filled up on a lot less. It's just before dinner here and I was updating my Fitday and discovered I've only eaten 960 calories today so far. I got myself a snack.

I guess my point is that it's sometimes HARD to eat that many calories now. But important to feel the best too.